Identifying Bias in Clinical Cancer Research

  • Francisco Emilio Vera-Badillo
  • Rachel P. Riechelmann


Bias in clinical research originates when any systematic error is introduced into any phase of a study that may lead to untrue results. Bias can occur when the research question is formulated, and during data collection, analyses, interpretation, and/or reporting (including publication bias). Because study results distorted by bias might directly impact patient care and health-care policies, there have been great efforts by the scientific community to avoid the introduction of bias in cancer research. In this chapter we discuss the most frequent types of bias encountered in clinical oncology research, as well as potential solutions to minimize them.


Bias Randomized clinical trial Cancer Trial design Conflicts of interest 


  1. 1.
    Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation. PLoS Med. 2008;5(11):e217. discussion e217CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boutron I, et al. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA. 2010;303(20):2058–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fletcher RH, Black B. “Spin” in scientific writing: scientific mischief and legal jeopardy. Med Law. 2007;26(3):511–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chan AW. Bias, spin, and misreporting: time for full access to trial protocols and results. PLoS Med. 2008;5(11):e230.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Flanagin A, et al. Prevalence of articles with honorary authors and ghost authors in peer-reviewed medical journals. JAMA. 1998;280(3):222–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pannucci CJ, Wilkins EG. Identifying and avoiding bias in research. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(2):619–25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marco CA, Larkin GL. Research ethics: ethical issues of data reporting and the quest for authenticity. Acad Emerg Med. 2000;7(6):691–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hrobjartsson A, Gotzsche PC. Powerful spin in the conclusion of Wampold et al.’s re-analysis of placebo versus no-treatment trials despite similar results as in original review. J Clin Psychol. 2007;63(4):373–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vera-Badillo FE, et al. Bias in reporting of end points of efficacy and toxicity in randomized, clinical trials for women with breast cancer. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(5):1238–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stern JM, Simes RJ. Publication bias: evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):640–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Galarraga V, Boffetta P. Coffee drinking and risk of lung cancer-a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2016;25(6):951–7. Epub 2016 Mar 28. Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tam VC, et al. Compendium of unpublished phase III trials in oncology: characteristics and impact on clinical practice. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(23):3133–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zhou Z, et al. Survival bias associated with time-to-treatment initiation in drug effectiveness evaluation: a comparison of methods. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;162(10):1016–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chaiteerakij R, et al. Metformin use and survival of patients with pancreatic cancer: a cautionary lesson. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(16):1898–904.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pildal J, et al. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36(4):847–57.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chvetzoff G, Tannock IF. Placebo effects in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95(1):19–29.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    McCambridge J, Witton J, Elbourne DR. Systematic review of the Hawthorne effect: new concepts are needed to study research participation effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(3):267–77.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tripepi G, et al. Bias in clinical research. Kidney Int. 2008;73(2):148–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Croswell JM, Ransohoff DF, Kramer BS. Principles of cancer screening: lessons from history and study design issues. Semin Oncol. 2010;37(3):202–15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pitrou I, et al. Reporting of safety results in published reports of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(19):1756–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ioannidis JP. Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(4):324–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sacher AG, Le LW, Leighl NB. Shifting patterns in the interpretation of phase III clinical trial outcomes in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: the bar is dropping. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(14):1407–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vera-Badillo FE, et al. Bias in reporting of randomised clinical trials in oncology. Eur J Cancer. 2016;61:29–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ioannidis JP, Contopoulos-Ioannidis DG. Reporting of safety data from randomised trials. Lancet. 1998;352(9142):1752–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ioannidis JP. Adverse events in randomized trials: neglected, restricted, distorted, and silenced. Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(19):1737–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ioannidis JP, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(10):781–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Seruga B, et al. Reporting of serious adverse drug reactions of targeted anticancer agents in pivotal phase III clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(2):174–85.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tsang R, Colley L, Lynd LD. Inadequate statistical power to detect clinically significant differences in adverse event rates in randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(6):609–16.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ioannidis JP, Mulrow CD, Goodman SN. Adverse events: the more you search, the more you find. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144(4):298–300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Reed DA, et al. Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. JAMA. 2007;298(9):1002–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hannink G, Gooszen HG, Rovers MM. Comparison of registered and published primary outcomes in randomized clinical trials of surgical interventions. Ann Surg. 2013;257(5):818–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Simes RJ. Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials. J Clin Oncol. 1986;4(10):1529–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kirkham JJ, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ. 2010;340:c365.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    International Collaborative Group on Clinical Trial Registries. Position paper and consensus recommendations on clinical trial registries. Ad Hoc Working Party of the International Collaborative Group on Clinical Trials Registries. Clin Trials Metaanal. 1993;28(4–5):255–66.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dickersin K, Rennie D. Registering clinical trials. JAMA. 2003;290(4):516–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Clinical Trial Registration. Accessed 19 Feb 2017.
  37. 37.
    Laine C, et al. Clinical trial registration—looking back and moving ahead. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(26):2734–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zarin DA, Tse T. Trust but verify: trial registration and determining fidelity to the protocol. Ann Intern Med. 2013;159(1):65–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francisco Emilio Vera-Badillo
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Rachel P. Riechelmann
    • 4
  1. 1.Canadian Cancer Trials GroupQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  2. 2.Department of OncologyQueen’s UniversityKingstonCanada
  3. 3.Centro Universitario Contra el CancerHospital Universitario Dr. Jose E. Gonzalez, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo LeonMonterreyMexico
  4. 4.Department of Clinical OncologyAC Camargo Cancer CenterSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations